It is currently 20 Oct 2017, 07:48

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 103

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 15

Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Sep 2011, 14:14
beckee529 wrote:
Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping district are expected to close within five years as a result of competition from a SpendLess discount department store that just opened, those locations will not stay vacant for long. In the five years since the opening of Colson's, a nondiscount department store, a new store has opened at the location of every store in the shopping district that closed because it could not compete with Colson's.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Many customers of Colson's are expected to do less shopping there than they did before the SpendLess store opened.
B. Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping district since Colson's opened have been discount stores.
C. At present, the central shopping district has as many stores operating in it as it ever had.
D. Over the course of the next five years, it is expected that Goreville's population will grow at a faster rate than it has for the past several decades.
E. Many stores in the central shopping district sell types of merchandise that are not available at either SpendLess or Colson's.

B explains why we cannot assume Colson's effect will happen with SpendLess.

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 15

Senior Manager
Status: MBAing!!!!
Joined: 24 Jun 2011
Posts: 287

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 56

Location: United States (FL)
Concentration: Finance, Real Estate
GPA: 3.65
WE: Project Management (Real Estate)
Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Oct 2011, 12:40
I picked B....if the discount stores in Goreville closed due to competition from Spend Less discount then a new type of non-discount stores will occupy the vacant spaces

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 56

Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Posts: 142

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 2

Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Oct 2011, 21:28
+1 for B

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 2

Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Posts: 248

Kudos [?]: 230 [1], given: 20

Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jan 2012, 07:10
1
KUDOS
sgupta0827 wrote:
Although many tried to explain here the question, I still don't understand why the answer should be B. Although I didn't find any answer with which I was satisfied, I chose C.

In the case of Colson's opening, new business came into picture by employing a different way of business (i.e., discount).

But in the case of SpendLess, those old shops are already discount operated. Hence to sustain the business, new stores should come up with alternates other than discounts.

Hence, with the given set of answer choices, B is the only one that explains this situation.

IMO, one can come up with some other alternative better than discounts, but as this is not indicated by any choice, we need to select B.
_________________

-------------------------
-Aravind Chembeti

Kudos [?]: 230 [1], given: 20

Manager
Joined: 10 Oct 2011
Posts: 63

Kudos [?]: 121 [1], given: 37

Location: Korea, Republic of
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GMAT Date: 08-16-2012
GPA: 3.05
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2012, 21:40
1
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Although the discount stores in Goreville's central shopping district are expected to close within five years as a
result of competition from a Spend Less discount department store that just opened, those locations will not
stay vacant for long. In the five years since the opening of Colson's, a nondiscount department store, a new
store has opened at the location of every store in the shopping district that closed because it could not compete
with Colson's.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Many customers of Colson's are expected to do less shopping there than they did before the Spend Less
store opened.
(B) Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping district since Colson's opened have been
discount stores.
(C) At present, the central shopping district has as many stores operating in it as it ever had.
(D) Over the course of the next five years, it is expected that Goreville's population will grow at a faster rate
than it has for the past several decades.
(E) Many stores in the central shopping district sell types of merchandise that are not available at either
SpendLess or Colson's.

a tough problem for me.

the conclusion
The vacancy in the shopping district will not stay long, because Spendless will take the empty space.

the premises
The case with Colson's(Non-discount) will happen to that of Spendless(Discount)
Colson competed with the stores around and the stores around closed because of the competition
Spendless will compete with the stores around and these stores will close

In order to weaken the conclusion, we need something to prove that the empty space will stay vacant.

(B) Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping district since Colson's opened have been
discount stores.

If the newly opened stores are the discount stores, these stores will compete with Spendless and close down.
The empty spaces will stay vacant.

Please correct my reasoning if wrong.
_________________

Luck is the additional surplus on the way to one's constant effort.

Kudos [?]: 121 [1], given: 37

Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 389

Kudos [?]: 100 [0], given: 13

Location: United States
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT 1: 680 Q50 V32
Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jun 2012, 07:36
The stimulus states that the closure around the non-discount store were quickly filled up. Therefore the closures around the discount store too will be filled up fast. But what if the new stores which got filled up where still discount stores? We know those around Colson's werent competing with Colson's. So, they were fine. But those around Spend Less will be directly competing with them!!! So, they will get screwed.

Kudos [?]: 100 [0], given: 13

Intern
Joined: 01 Apr 2012
Posts: 25

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 11

Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2012, 23:55
what is the logic behind taking B as correct?need expert here.

The logic as I understand: as Spendless is the rival of discount stores, it will force them to close even if new discount stores open after Colsons's. Thus, the district will remain vacant. But, the premise states the reaction of existing discount stores and not a new ones. we do not know whether Spendless could have the same effect on the newly closed discount stores. Am I missing something here? experts please

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 11

VP
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 1403

Kudos [?]: 159 [0], given: 916

Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Dec 2012, 03:17
experts, pls help.

pls, explain what do you do before you look at the answer choices and explain the reasoning. Thank you. this is terribly hard question.

Kudos [?]: 159 [0], given: 916

Intern
Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Posts: 48

Kudos [?]: 32 [2], given: 11

Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2012, 03:15
2
KUDOS
notahug wrote:
Although the discount stores in Goreville’s central shopping district are expected to close
within five years as a result of competition from a SpendLess discount department store
that just opened, those locations will not stay vacant for long. In the five years since the
opening of Colson’s, a nondiscount department store, a new store has opened at the
location of every store in the shopping district that closed because it could not compete
with Colson’s.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Many customers of Colson’s are expected to do less shopping there than they did
before the SpendLess store opened.

B. Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping district since
Colson’s opened have been discount stores.

C. At present, the central shopping district has as many stores operating in it as it

D. Over the course of the next five years, it is expected that Goreville’s population
will grow at a faster rate than it has for the past several decades.

E. Many stores in the central shopping district sell types of merchandise that are not
available at either SpendLess or Colson’s.

I'm not an expert but this is my reasoning: the argument says that since the opening of Colson’s, a nondiscount department store, a new store has opened at the location of every store in the shopping district that closed because it could not compete with Colson’s. The argument then concludes that the vacancy (of the places where the discount stores that closed because of the competition with SpendLess discount department) will not be for long: new (discount - this is the conclusion hint) store will open at those vacancies. It is important that we know the conclusion "those locations will not stay vacant for long".

Note that when we read this, we will see that gap between the 2 statements: there is no connection between them. The first premise talks about discount stores. The second premise talks about the nondiscount stores. At the abstract level, the argument tries to conclude that the phenomenon that happens for the nondiscount stores will also happen for the similar matter of discount stores. This is the gap in the reasoning as the argument tries to use analogy in a loose way: things that happen in one situation won't necessarily in another.

Answer B attack that hole: it points out the difference between the 2 situations: discount stores v.s. nondiscount stores. It says that since the ones that fill up the spots left by (presumably but wrong - nondiscount) stores are indeed discount stores. It means that the spots left by the discount stores (that can't compete with the discount store SpendLess) won't be necessarily filled up (by the discount stores).

This one is subtle and definitely takes more than 2 minutes for me. To solve this, I think you need to look at a higher, abstract level instead of the details. Also, if you think of other ways of weakening an argument such as find another cause, or weaking the causal relationship, you will be stucked because the 2 premise has no connection (which is a good sign that you should step back and look at the whole thing as a whole).

Kudos [?]: 32 [2], given: 11

VP
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 1403

Kudos [?]: 159 [1], given: 916

Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jan 2013, 02:34
1
KUDOS
very hard question
why it is hard because what we prethink before we read answer choices is different from what is in correct answer .

premise: the reopening of nondiscount happens after 5 years.
conclusion: there will be reopening of discount.

prethink:
- assumption: situation is similar in both non discount and discount store
- weakener: must show that the situation is different.

there is no match which say about different situation.

reread b, we see that b is close the what we prethink.

why this question is hard?
because what we prethink is different from the correct answer .
it take rather long time to read and understand the argument and it take rather long time to reread the answer choice. This question is rather time consuming.

so, hard reasoning and long time makes this question very hard. I do not think that in the test room , we are calm enough to do this question in 2 minutes. gmat presents question which look simple but hard.

pls comment/confirm my posting.members, experts.
_________________

visit my facebook to help me.
on facebook, my name is: thang thang thang

Kudos [?]: 159 [1], given: 916

Intern
Joined: 01 Mar 2013
Posts: 2

Kudos [?]: 2 [2], given: 15

Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 May 2013, 22:11
2
KUDOS
every good, I reread the question and understand it thoroughly. Thanks and kudo for you.
catennacio wrote:
notahug wrote:
Although the discount stores in Goreville’s central shopping district are expected to close
within five years as a result of competition from a SpendLess discount department store
that just opened, those locations will not stay vacant for long. In the five years since the
opening of Colson’s, a nondiscount department store, a new store has opened at the
location of every store in the shopping district that closed because it could not compete
with Colson’s.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Many customers of Colson’s are expected to do less shopping there than they did
before the SpendLess store opened.

B. Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping district since
Colson’s opened have been discount stores.

C. At present, the central shopping district has as many stores operating in it as it

D. Over the course of the next five years, it is expected that Goreville’s population
will grow at a faster rate than it has for the past several decades.

E. Many stores in the central shopping district sell types of merchandise that are not
available at either SpendLess or Colson’s.

I'm not an expert but this is my reasoning: the argument says that since the opening of Colson’s, a nondiscount department store, a new store has opened at the location of every store in the shopping district that closed because it could not compete with Colson’s. The argument then concludes that the vacancy (of the places where the discount stores that closed because of the competition with SpendLess discount department) will not be for long: new (discount - this is the conclusion hint) store will open at those vacancies. It is important that we know the conclusion "those locations will not stay vacant for long".

Note that when we read this, we will see that gap between the 2 statements: there is no connection between them. The first premise talks about discount stores. The second premise talks about the nondiscount stores. At the abstract level, the argument tries to conclude that the phenomenon that happens for the nondiscount stores will also happen for the similar matter of discount stores. This is the gap in the reasoning as the argument tries to use analogy in a loose way: things that happen in one situation won't necessarily in another.

Answer B attack that hole: it points out the difference between the 2 situations: discount stores v.s. nondiscount stores. It says that since the ones that fill up the spots left by (presumably but wrong - nondiscount) stores are indeed discount stores. It means that the spots left by the discount stores (that can't compete with the discount store SpendLess) won't be necessarily filled up (by the discount stores).

This one is subtle and definitely takes more than 2 minutes for me. To solve this, I think you need to look at a higher, abstract level instead of the details. Also, if you think of other ways of weakening an argument such as find another cause, or weaking the causal relationship, you will be stucked because the 2 premise has no connection (which is a good sign that you should step back and look at the whole thing as a whole).

Kudos [?]: 2 [2], given: 15

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 1127

Kudos [?]: 3478 [3], given: 123

Location: United States
Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2013, 01:36
3
KUDOS
B is correct.

Tough question. This is my reasoning.

FACTS OF NON-DISCOUNT STORES
- All nondiscount store closed because of competition from a non-discount store (Colson).
- After that there a new store has opened at the location of closed non-discount stores.

FACTS OF DISCOUNT STORES.
- All discount stores in Goreville are expected to closed because of competition from a discount store (SpendLess).

CONCLUSION: a new store will open at the locations of closed discount stores.

Assumption: The fact of nondiscount stores cases is also true for discount stores cases.

The conclusion will be weakened if discount stores and nondiscount stores do not follow the same pattern.

B correctly states that the stores that have opened since Colson’s opened are discount stores, NOT non-discount stores ==> we cannot use the fact of nondiscount stores to make a conclusion for discount stores.

Hope it helps.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Kudos [?]: 3478 [3], given: 123

Intern
Joined: 03 Jul 2013
Posts: 45

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 9

Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Jul 2013, 08:54
I have noticed a tie between B and E

Just a quick analysis of the argument

Argument says; Discount Stores expected to close, but wont be closed for long

Reason: when Calson (non discount opened).....shops closed but later vacant spaces occupied by new shops

Take away: Calson -> non discount : Other shops reopened

Question: what type of shops and why, obviously different from Calson and exploiting a market nitche.

Now: Spendless (discount ) will open, But according to previous trend, vacated shop areas will reopen...will this be true?

B) Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping district since
Colson’s opened have been discount stores. The previous nitch which facilited for reopening no longer exist, so weaken the argument by putting a hole in the previous cycle

E) Many stores in the central shopping district sell types of merchandise that are not
available at either SpendLess or Colson’s. : Then the shops should not even closed in the first place both during the opening of Colson and expected opening of spendless - Wrong answer because it does nothing to the above argument

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 9

Manager
Status: Got Bling! Joined Phd Finance at IIML
Joined: 03 Jul 2013
Posts: 95

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 39

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: iim-bangalore - Class of 1994
GMAT 1: 750 Q59 V43
GPA: 3.12
WE: Research (Investment Banking)
Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jul 2013, 23:13
sondenso wrote:
gmat blows wrote:
notahug wrote:
Although the discount stores in Goreville’s central shopping district are expected to close
within five years as a result of competition from a SpendLess discount department store
that just opened, those locations will not stay vacant for long. In the five years since the
opening of Colson’s, a nondiscount department store, a new store has opened at the
location of every store in the shopping district that closed because it could not compete
with Colson’s.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

C. At present, the central shopping district has as many stores operating in it as it

E. Many stores in the central shopping district sell types of merchandise that are not
available at either SpendLess or Colson’s.

I think it is E. The argument that the discount stores are expected to close within 5 years is based on what happened to the non dscount stores having to compete with Colson's. HOwever, if those discount stores, in question, sell things that are not available at either SpendLess or Colson's they will probably not close since they are not directly competing against them anymore. Basically, this argument becomes flawed with the information stated in E since the previous scenario, with the non discount store can not be translated to the new scenario, since they are not slightly different.

if the stem had also said that the non discount stores closed, even though they sold different things, then E would not weaken the argument.

Mark incomplete and come back for a second round but question will not improve

Also Discount store is opening up but info relates to a non discount store that opened earlier.

A. Many customers of Colson’s are expected to do less shopping there than they did
before the SpendLess store opened. Colsons opned 5 years ago . Spendless will take customers from Colsons - irrelevant

B. Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping district since
Colson’s opened have been discount stores. yes material, coud not exit choice however because it does not complete the argument to strengthen or weaken it after al that is what he is addressing saying last time we had discount stores come u when Colsons was opened. But is the choice if already been there what now ( not elegant)

C>> At present, the central shopping district has as many stores operating in it as it

C. could be irrelevant, lets look at the other choices - after all at least it could point to over capacity without any population argument

I went with C after much deliberation why B did not make the cut.

D. Over the course of the next five years, it is expected that Goreville’s population
will grow at a faster rate than it has for the past several decades.

E. Many stores in the central shopping district sell types of merchandise that are not
available at either SpendLess or Colson’s.

D and E support argument

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 39

Manager
Joined: 31 Mar 2013
Posts: 66

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 14

Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Nov 2013, 00:47
can someone please explain how B can be the answer.Since Colson's has been used just as an e.g to explain the situation that new stores opened up in place of the closed stores so the same will happen in the case of spendless stores, so what a difference it makes whether it was a discount store that opened up at colson's time or not?

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 14

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 1127

Kudos [?]: 3478 [22], given: 123

Location: United States
Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Nov 2013, 03:19
22
KUDOS
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
veenu08 wrote:
can someone please explain how B can be the answer.Since Colson's has been used just as an e.g to explain the situation that new stores opened up in place of the closed stores so the same will happen in the case of spendless stores, so what a difference it makes whether it was a discount store that opened up at colson's time or not?

Hello veenu08.

This question is definitely good to practice. The way GMAC writes CR questions is superb Now let see why B weakens the conclusion.

ANALYZE THE STIMULUS:

Fact: The discount stores in Goreville's central shopping district are expected to close within five years as a
result of competition from a Spend Less discount department store that just opened,
Conclusion: those locations will not stay vacant for long.

Reason to support conclusion: In the five years since the opening of Colson's, a nondiscount department store, a new store has opened at the location of every store in the shopping district that closed because it could not compete with Colson's.

ANALYZE OPTION B:

The logic of the argument is: New Discount store opened ==> Current Discount store will be closed ==> But there will be another Discount stores opened in the locations of closed stores.
The reason to back up: Colson, a NON-discount store opened ==> Current NON-discount stores will be closed ==> But there was a NEW store opened in the location of closed Non-discount stores.

STOP. what kind of "NEW store"?

The argument is WEAK is because it uses PARALLEL reasoning improperly. The reasoning is true if the NEW store has the same nature as the closed NON-discount stored. If the NEW opened store is NOT non-discount stores ==> The reasoning/parallel reasoning is NOT valid.

Option B: Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping district since Colson's opened have been discount stores
B says exactly the same ==> B weakens the argument.

Hope it helps.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Kudos [?]: 3478 [22], given: 123

Manager
Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 176

Kudos [?]: 157 [1], given: 29

GMAT 1: 590 Q40 V30
GMAT 2: 730 Q49 V40
WE: Project Management (Entertainment and Sports)
Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Feb 2014, 01:10
1
KUDOS
gaurav2k101 wrote:
can anyone explain me the meaning of the passage
than only it will be clear that what will weaken it

Basically the shopping district is expected to increasingly close its stores because of the upcoming opening of Spendless, a discount store, which will steal their business. The author is supporting his point ("those locations will not stay vacant for long") paralleling an akin situation: When Colson's, a non discount, had opened new stores opened in turn.

There's an evident flaw in this reasoning, stores closed down as a result of Colson's opening; one viable way to regain a slice of the market in the area is to open cheaper stores. If Spendless is already a discount store, opening few more discount stores in the area would be useless.

I hope it helps.
_________________

learn the rules of the game, then play better than anyone else.

Kudos [?]: 157 [1], given: 29

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10118

Kudos [?]: 262 [0], given: 0

Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2014, 13:02
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 262 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 31 Mar 2014
Posts: 20

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 1

Concentration: Operations, General Management
Schools: IIMA (PGPX)
Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2014, 02:46
Although the discount stores in Goreville’s central shopping district are expected to close
within five years as a result of competition from a SpendLess discount department store
that just opened, those locations will not stay vacant for long. In the five years since the
opening of Colson’s, a nondiscount department store, a new store has opened at the
location of every store in the shopping district that closed because it could not compete
with Colson’s.
Concluson: The shops will not be empty.
Assumption is loud and clear. The trend continues in future also. The key difference is Colson is=non discounted store, whereas Spend less- discounted store.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Many customers of Colson’s are expected to do less shopping there than they did
before the SpendLess store opened. - OFS as i'm bothered about only whether stores will be filled up or not.

B. Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping district since
Colson’s opened have been discount stores.

Yes, it is the answer. Previously colson is a non-discounted store. So discounted shops took place of previous ones. However, this time Spend=less is discounted shop. Thus new shops can't take their place. ( Unless some people plan to give goods for free )

C. At present, the central shopping district has as many stores operating in it as it
ever had.-- OFS . I am not into operations wants to see only if stores will be open or not:)

D. Over the course of the next five years, it is expected that Goreville’s population
will grow at a faster rate than it has for the past several decades.
OFS
E. Many stores in the central shopping district sell types of merchandise that are not
available at either SpendLess or Colson’s.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 1

Current Student
Joined: 20 Jan 2014
Posts: 175

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 120

Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Marketing
Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Sep 2014, 09:18
Although the discount stores in Goreville’s central shopping district are expected to close
within five years as a result of competition from a SpendLess discount department store
that just opened, those locations will not stay vacant for long. In the five years since the
opening of Colson’s, a nondiscount department store, a new store has opened at the
location of every store in the shopping district that closed because it could not compete
with Colson’s.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Many customers of Colson’s are expected to do less shopping there than they did
before the SpendLess store opened.

B. Increasingly, the stores that have opened in the central shopping district since
Colson’s opened have been discount stores.

C. At present, the central shopping district has as many stores operating in it as it

D. Over the course of the next five years, it is expected that Goreville’s population
will grow at a faster rate than it has for the past several decades.

E. Many stores in the central shopping district sell types of merchandise that are not
available at either SpendLess or Colson’s.

The main point here is that argument is saying that the stores that will be close, other store will be open at their place. It is not saying only that stores will be closed.
Choice E says that tose stores will never close. So B is Answer
_________________

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 120

Re: Although the discount stores in Goreville central shopping   [#permalink] 24 Sep 2014, 09:18

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5    Next  [ 82 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by